This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This page has been
transwikied to
Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here ( logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
-- CopyToWiktionaryBot 06:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Only one example has a citation. All these examples need citations from verifiable sources.-- ZayZayEM 11:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the merging. My Famous Example is copy-pasted from the source, so it shall replace the "blot out the sun" (which may be given as a popular later variant).
David Latapie (
✒ |
@) 16:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I donnot agree with the merge. If u were merging it why create this word? No Sense at all
I think there are far too many examples on this page, most of which are not really Laconic. They ought to express an idea or a more complicated thought with very few words. 'Nuts' means nothing more than that, and implies nothing more than that. Conversely, the Philip II example efficiently conveys an opinion and attitude with one word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.194.156 ( talk) 09:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps the article would be better named "Quotes attributed to the Spartans"?-- SkiDragon ( talk) 01:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Not a bad article, and certainly a relevant one, but painful to read. The reader is drowned in gratuitous information. If you feel up to it you'd make me eternally grateful. Maikel ( talk) 19:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Is it just me, or does viking, and by extension nordic, culture have an equivalent? I just can't remember the name of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.91.89.250 ( talk) 20:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The article, as it currently stands, is a short descriptive paragraph followed by a horde of examples, many of which don't seem to fit the criteria mentioned in the body of the article. I recommend pruning all but a few of the examples. If no one objects, I'll go through and do it when I have time.-- Aervanath ( talk) 01:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
TCO ( talk) 18:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
My word web says it's defined as "Brief and to the point". Perhaps we can reach a consensus of what is not appropriate for this article. List the quotes you think are wrong, and perhaps we can agree on something... Smarkflea ( talk) 19:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Your definition is correct, but the page examples are awry. Point has been made already in this talk page. Many of the sayings are more descriptive of the Spartan stoicism (which is admirable for its own reasons), then pithy remarks. Think how WELL the "if story" emplifies a Laconic phrase. Similarly the Abdul Azziz story (where just the greeting suffices and no message is even needed). P.s. The list is also missing a famous story of how some other city asked for help from the Spartans and they criticized the messanger for being verbose, so he recomposed the message. Find that story as it totally shows what Laconic is about.
The page on Laconic terseness is decidedly lacking it. The Cap'n ( talk) 19:41, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
How about "Peccavi" (I have sinned/Sindh) used by General Charles Napier in a telegram to British military leaders after his nineteenth-century capture of the Pakistani city of Sindh?
50.10.99.70 (
talk) 01:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
What does everyone think about adding some examples in media (literature, TV, film, etc.), including fiction or non-fiction? An example that comes to mind is the TV series Spartacus. I am not sure if this is strictly laconic in style (?). Do statements like the following fit the laconic style addressed in this article?: "When has son denied father?" / "Man of ambition is capable of anything." / "I will not die faceless slave forgotten by history." / "This is but glorious beginning." (see: this article for more background) -- Thorwald ( talk) 23:54, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
I feel that it is very inappropriate not to have the corresponding Greek phrase for each English translation in an article entitled "Laconic phrase". I would suggest that all examples that are not derived from Greek phrases be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.65.122.90 ( talk) 21:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Here are several translations, with links, of Gorgo's reply to the question of why only Spartan women can rule men:
There are various other translations, but the point is that the position of women in Spartan society was much more equal than elsewhere in Ancient Greece. WolfmanSF ( talk) 18:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
The list of quotes in the article seems excessively long. In addition, the sources for the non-Spartan examples are reliable sources for the quotes being accurate, but do not seem to back up the claim that they are "laconic phrases". (Not to mention the fact that almost all the Spartan examples are sourced to Plutarch, which makes their justifications as laconic overly reliant on one source.) In general, the list seems somewhat indiscriminate in that it seems to lack clear criteria for what makes them "laconic phrases". -- V2Blast ( talk) 06:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
The lead currently defines a laconic phrase as "a concise or terse statement". Though brevity is a necessary condition, it is not sufficient. For example, telegraphic brevity (" Sighted sub, sank same"), punning ("Peccavi"), and concise mottos ("La Garde meurt, elle ne se rend pas") don't sound laconic to me. Here is what some reliable sources say:
What these definitions have in common is a sense of bluntness, insolence, or sarcasm. Another element seems to be ellipsis or indirectness:
The closest modern word would be "snarky". Just think of Lycurgus's "So that we may always have something to offer." He realizes that small sacrifices seem cheap, but he pretends that he is thinking of the future, and also implicitly saying that his interlocuter's city is living beyond its means by offering lavish sacrifices. Note also that most (though not all) of the 'classic' examples of laconic phrases are rejoinders to questions. Now it is certainly true that the word is often used more loosely, but this is an encyclopedia article talking about the concept, not a dictionary article talking about usage. I'll make some edits to the article and look forward to other editors' comments. -- Macrakis ( talk) 19:43, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Section currently reads:
The first two seem to be talking about concision, not laconicity. They are missing the core defiance expressed by a laconic remark. Laconic remarks in a military context (molon lave, "if") are not efficient, but defiant. This section needs to be completely reworked. -- Macrakis ( talk) 23:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
The first section of the article talks about a laconic response being used to disarm a long and pompous speech, with "The most famous example being the Battle of Thermopolae". There are several quotes from the battle of Thermopolae in the many (and excessive) examples, but none of them seem to in response to a long pompous speech. Can we include the reference/example, or remove the phrase? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.144.208 ( talk) 20:51, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Before complaining about the number of examples, one should remember that the Spartan quotations handed down to us through history represent the sole origin of the term "laconic". If you're not interested in these examples, you're not interested in the subject. Whether the non-Spartan examples are essential may be debated, but based on contributions to the article, there is clear interest in having them there. WolfmanSF ( talk) 23:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
An editor has recently added the claim that "Australia is often cited as a modern stronghold of such humor". A quick Google Books search shows that lots of groups of people are famous for their laconic humor:
I don't think Australia has a unique claim here. Perhaps something like the book National styles of humor would be a reliable source for a claim like that. But sadly the only thing it qualifies as laconic is the Australian accent (whatever that means). -- Macrakis ( talk) 23:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Under the essay for avoiding example cruft (which does not constitute Wikipedia policy), it is suggested that "One, or at most a few examples about the subject matter under discussion, should suffice." That presupposes that the subject matter can be well conveyed by descriptive text, and that the examples are just icing on the article's cake. That's not really true of this subject; the recorded Spartan examples gave rise to the concept, and only the Spartan examples truly convey the actual characteristics of the subject. They have also been chosen to in a sense tell Sparta's story, one that has great cultural significance, which is probably why the article is widely viewed (17,000 views in the last 30 days). It is suggested in the essay, "Where the list of examples as a whole has verifiable cultural significance, consider creating a separate article." I suppose we could change the article to "List of examples of a laconic phrase", or split the list of examples off from the short introduction, but would would accomplish nothing very constructive. We've been through several iterations of this discussion, with the same outcome every time. WolfmanSF ( talk) 05:20, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, our policy is quite flexible, but at the same time quite strict with what is to be verified: anything which was questioned must be verified. Not every quip should be called "laconic". For example, " "By remaining poor, and each man not desiring to possess more than his fellow." I would call a wisecrack, but hardly a model laconic phrase, especially compared to the classic "With it or on it", or, as clarified for "non-spartans" : "With the shield of on it". Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
There are zillions of puns, quips, famous quotes, of various types; we don't collect them all into wikipedia; why Spartans are preferred in this respect? Why not collect all witticisms of, say, Cicero? Answer: examples are, you know, examples. And they must be chosen wisely. E.g., when scholarly sources pick some of them as examples.
Now, quite a few of them are referred to apophthegmata laconica. First, this is basically a primary source (and they actually belong in Wikisource). Second, Plutarch recorded hundreds of them, with only several listed here. For them, there is neither secondary source, nor comment on their historical significance. For example, "With it or on it!" is a "canonic laconic". However I have never heard of ""You seem not to realize that your proposal is the same as fighting fifty wolves after defeating a thousand sheep." being described as a "laconic" i.e., a terse wisecrack. It is a wisecrack, yes, but I doubt it is a good example of terseness. Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
I will review more later. Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Laconic phrase. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:31, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I hesitate to add this myself when there's concern about excessive examples, but if we wanted a particularly recent one (more so than the Korean War), there's a good one in this article:
-- BDD ( talk) 14:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
In Wikipedia articles may include several quotations, as illustrative examples for encyclopedic content. The proper storage for collections of quotations is Wikiquote, to which a prominent link is provided in articles where prominent quotations are expected. See eg. at the bottom of " Albert Einstein" page. We do not list all Einstein quips in his bio, do we? Same here. Staszek Lem ( talk) 23:01, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
"'Sorry, you cannot make a drastic edit like that and undo years of effort without discussion. "
- Your edit summary indicates that you must read and understand
WP:OWN and
WP:3RR.
Staszek Lem (
talk) 17:03, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
This article is not special. You can have maybe a half-dozen Spartan examples to give a user an overview and then a half-dozen or so non-Spartan to show how it has been used in different contexts but several dozen quotations on a topic is literally the function of Wikiquote, not Wikipedia. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:52, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
I removed this entry because it doesn't look like a thorough discussion has taken place (yet). Erpert blah, blah, blah... 19:49, 2 August 2018 (UTC) |
This is a followup on discussion with User:WolfmanSF about my reasoning in removing the sister links to wikitionary and wikidata from the Laconic phrase article. It turns out that I misspoke in my edit comment--even though these links appear in the "See also" section, they're covered by WP:SISTER, not WP:EL; but the guideline is similar: it says that sister page links are encouraged when such links are likely to be useful to our readers. I would argue that the definition isn't useful because it covers information already in the lead paragraph of the article, and the wikidata entry is only useful to expert editors, not typical users.
Now, having explained my reasoning, I'm fine with the current state of the article. My main concern was increasing visibility for the wikiquote link, and this has been achieved by removing it from the sister links box. Regards, Dan Bloch ( talk) 06:37, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Given the endless list of possible modern examples, I suggest we not add them to this article. A better alternative would be to add them to Quotations related to Laconic phrases at Wikiquote. WolfmanSF ( talk) 21:37, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
I've used [9] a 1939 translation of Philip's famous threat as recorded by Plutarch. It might be unfamiliar because it isn't easy to translate into English. Sometimes you'll see "I will turn you out" or suchlike, sometimes it's more like "I will lay waste to your country" and really, both are good. The word ἀναστάτους means uprooted/exiled/driven out when used of people, and ruined/devastated/laid waste when used of a place, so when he says "I will make you ἀναστάτους" he might well be talking of the people and the place too. NebY ( talk) 21:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This page has been
transwikied to
Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here ( logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
-- CopyToWiktionaryBot 06:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Only one example has a citation. All these examples need citations from verifiable sources.-- ZayZayEM 11:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the merging. My Famous Example is copy-pasted from the source, so it shall replace the "blot out the sun" (which may be given as a popular later variant).
David Latapie (
✒ |
@) 16:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I donnot agree with the merge. If u were merging it why create this word? No Sense at all
I think there are far too many examples on this page, most of which are not really Laconic. They ought to express an idea or a more complicated thought with very few words. 'Nuts' means nothing more than that, and implies nothing more than that. Conversely, the Philip II example efficiently conveys an opinion and attitude with one word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.194.156 ( talk) 09:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps the article would be better named "Quotes attributed to the Spartans"?-- SkiDragon ( talk) 01:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Not a bad article, and certainly a relevant one, but painful to read. The reader is drowned in gratuitous information. If you feel up to it you'd make me eternally grateful. Maikel ( talk) 19:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Is it just me, or does viking, and by extension nordic, culture have an equivalent? I just can't remember the name of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.91.89.250 ( talk) 20:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The article, as it currently stands, is a short descriptive paragraph followed by a horde of examples, many of which don't seem to fit the criteria mentioned in the body of the article. I recommend pruning all but a few of the examples. If no one objects, I'll go through and do it when I have time.-- Aervanath ( talk) 01:47, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
TCO ( talk) 18:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
My word web says it's defined as "Brief and to the point". Perhaps we can reach a consensus of what is not appropriate for this article. List the quotes you think are wrong, and perhaps we can agree on something... Smarkflea ( talk) 19:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Your definition is correct, but the page examples are awry. Point has been made already in this talk page. Many of the sayings are more descriptive of the Spartan stoicism (which is admirable for its own reasons), then pithy remarks. Think how WELL the "if story" emplifies a Laconic phrase. Similarly the Abdul Azziz story (where just the greeting suffices and no message is even needed). P.s. The list is also missing a famous story of how some other city asked for help from the Spartans and they criticized the messanger for being verbose, so he recomposed the message. Find that story as it totally shows what Laconic is about.
The page on Laconic terseness is decidedly lacking it. The Cap'n ( talk) 19:41, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
How about "Peccavi" (I have sinned/Sindh) used by General Charles Napier in a telegram to British military leaders after his nineteenth-century capture of the Pakistani city of Sindh?
50.10.99.70 (
talk) 01:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
What does everyone think about adding some examples in media (literature, TV, film, etc.), including fiction or non-fiction? An example that comes to mind is the TV series Spartacus. I am not sure if this is strictly laconic in style (?). Do statements like the following fit the laconic style addressed in this article?: "When has son denied father?" / "Man of ambition is capable of anything." / "I will not die faceless slave forgotten by history." / "This is but glorious beginning." (see: this article for more background) -- Thorwald ( talk) 23:54, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
I feel that it is very inappropriate not to have the corresponding Greek phrase for each English translation in an article entitled "Laconic phrase". I would suggest that all examples that are not derived from Greek phrases be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.65.122.90 ( talk) 21:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Here are several translations, with links, of Gorgo's reply to the question of why only Spartan women can rule men:
There are various other translations, but the point is that the position of women in Spartan society was much more equal than elsewhere in Ancient Greece. WolfmanSF ( talk) 18:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
The list of quotes in the article seems excessively long. In addition, the sources for the non-Spartan examples are reliable sources for the quotes being accurate, but do not seem to back up the claim that they are "laconic phrases". (Not to mention the fact that almost all the Spartan examples are sourced to Plutarch, which makes their justifications as laconic overly reliant on one source.) In general, the list seems somewhat indiscriminate in that it seems to lack clear criteria for what makes them "laconic phrases". -- V2Blast ( talk) 06:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
The lead currently defines a laconic phrase as "a concise or terse statement". Though brevity is a necessary condition, it is not sufficient. For example, telegraphic brevity (" Sighted sub, sank same"), punning ("Peccavi"), and concise mottos ("La Garde meurt, elle ne se rend pas") don't sound laconic to me. Here is what some reliable sources say:
What these definitions have in common is a sense of bluntness, insolence, or sarcasm. Another element seems to be ellipsis or indirectness:
The closest modern word would be "snarky". Just think of Lycurgus's "So that we may always have something to offer." He realizes that small sacrifices seem cheap, but he pretends that he is thinking of the future, and also implicitly saying that his interlocuter's city is living beyond its means by offering lavish sacrifices. Note also that most (though not all) of the 'classic' examples of laconic phrases are rejoinders to questions. Now it is certainly true that the word is often used more loosely, but this is an encyclopedia article talking about the concept, not a dictionary article talking about usage. I'll make some edits to the article and look forward to other editors' comments. -- Macrakis ( talk) 19:43, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Section currently reads:
The first two seem to be talking about concision, not laconicity. They are missing the core defiance expressed by a laconic remark. Laconic remarks in a military context (molon lave, "if") are not efficient, but defiant. This section needs to be completely reworked. -- Macrakis ( talk) 23:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
The first section of the article talks about a laconic response being used to disarm a long and pompous speech, with "The most famous example being the Battle of Thermopolae". There are several quotes from the battle of Thermopolae in the many (and excessive) examples, but none of them seem to in response to a long pompous speech. Can we include the reference/example, or remove the phrase? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.144.208 ( talk) 20:51, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Before complaining about the number of examples, one should remember that the Spartan quotations handed down to us through history represent the sole origin of the term "laconic". If you're not interested in these examples, you're not interested in the subject. Whether the non-Spartan examples are essential may be debated, but based on contributions to the article, there is clear interest in having them there. WolfmanSF ( talk) 23:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
An editor has recently added the claim that "Australia is often cited as a modern stronghold of such humor". A quick Google Books search shows that lots of groups of people are famous for their laconic humor:
I don't think Australia has a unique claim here. Perhaps something like the book National styles of humor would be a reliable source for a claim like that. But sadly the only thing it qualifies as laconic is the Australian accent (whatever that means). -- Macrakis ( talk) 23:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Under the essay for avoiding example cruft (which does not constitute Wikipedia policy), it is suggested that "One, or at most a few examples about the subject matter under discussion, should suffice." That presupposes that the subject matter can be well conveyed by descriptive text, and that the examples are just icing on the article's cake. That's not really true of this subject; the recorded Spartan examples gave rise to the concept, and only the Spartan examples truly convey the actual characteristics of the subject. They have also been chosen to in a sense tell Sparta's story, one that has great cultural significance, which is probably why the article is widely viewed (17,000 views in the last 30 days). It is suggested in the essay, "Where the list of examples as a whole has verifiable cultural significance, consider creating a separate article." I suppose we could change the article to "List of examples of a laconic phrase", or split the list of examples off from the short introduction, but would would accomplish nothing very constructive. We've been through several iterations of this discussion, with the same outcome every time. WolfmanSF ( talk) 05:20, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, our policy is quite flexible, but at the same time quite strict with what is to be verified: anything which was questioned must be verified. Not every quip should be called "laconic". For example, " "By remaining poor, and each man not desiring to possess more than his fellow." I would call a wisecrack, but hardly a model laconic phrase, especially compared to the classic "With it or on it", or, as clarified for "non-spartans" : "With the shield of on it". Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
There are zillions of puns, quips, famous quotes, of various types; we don't collect them all into wikipedia; why Spartans are preferred in this respect? Why not collect all witticisms of, say, Cicero? Answer: examples are, you know, examples. And they must be chosen wisely. E.g., when scholarly sources pick some of them as examples.
Now, quite a few of them are referred to apophthegmata laconica. First, this is basically a primary source (and they actually belong in Wikisource). Second, Plutarch recorded hundreds of them, with only several listed here. For them, there is neither secondary source, nor comment on their historical significance. For example, "With it or on it!" is a "canonic laconic". However I have never heard of ""You seem not to realize that your proposal is the same as fighting fifty wolves after defeating a thousand sheep." being described as a "laconic" i.e., a terse wisecrack. It is a wisecrack, yes, but I doubt it is a good example of terseness. Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
I will review more later. Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Laconic phrase. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:31, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I hesitate to add this myself when there's concern about excessive examples, but if we wanted a particularly recent one (more so than the Korean War), there's a good one in this article:
-- BDD ( talk) 14:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
In Wikipedia articles may include several quotations, as illustrative examples for encyclopedic content. The proper storage for collections of quotations is Wikiquote, to which a prominent link is provided in articles where prominent quotations are expected. See eg. at the bottom of " Albert Einstein" page. We do not list all Einstein quips in his bio, do we? Same here. Staszek Lem ( talk) 23:01, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
"'Sorry, you cannot make a drastic edit like that and undo years of effort without discussion. "
- Your edit summary indicates that you must read and understand
WP:OWN and
WP:3RR.
Staszek Lem (
talk) 17:03, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
This article is not special. You can have maybe a half-dozen Spartan examples to give a user an overview and then a half-dozen or so non-Spartan to show how it has been used in different contexts but several dozen quotations on a topic is literally the function of Wikiquote, not Wikipedia. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:52, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
I removed this entry because it doesn't look like a thorough discussion has taken place (yet). Erpert blah, blah, blah... 19:49, 2 August 2018 (UTC) |
This is a followup on discussion with User:WolfmanSF about my reasoning in removing the sister links to wikitionary and wikidata from the Laconic phrase article. It turns out that I misspoke in my edit comment--even though these links appear in the "See also" section, they're covered by WP:SISTER, not WP:EL; but the guideline is similar: it says that sister page links are encouraged when such links are likely to be useful to our readers. I would argue that the definition isn't useful because it covers information already in the lead paragraph of the article, and the wikidata entry is only useful to expert editors, not typical users.
Now, having explained my reasoning, I'm fine with the current state of the article. My main concern was increasing visibility for the wikiquote link, and this has been achieved by removing it from the sister links box. Regards, Dan Bloch ( talk) 06:37, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Given the endless list of possible modern examples, I suggest we not add them to this article. A better alternative would be to add them to Quotations related to Laconic phrases at Wikiquote. WolfmanSF ( talk) 21:37, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
I've used [9] a 1939 translation of Philip's famous threat as recorded by Plutarch. It might be unfamiliar because it isn't easy to translate into English. Sometimes you'll see "I will turn you out" or suchlike, sometimes it's more like "I will lay waste to your country" and really, both are good. The word ἀναστάτους means uprooted/exiled/driven out when used of people, and ruined/devastated/laid waste when used of a place, so when he says "I will make you ἀναστάτους" he might well be talking of the people and the place too. NebY ( talk) 21:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)